It appears the clubs of the Premier League are doing their best to join in with 'Dry January'.
That's certainly one word to describe the lack of transfer business completed during this month's winter window, which looks like it will less slam shut but more close gently on Friday evening.
With just three days of business left, the 20 top-flight clubs have spent a cumulative £65million on new signings this month.
It represents a staggering fall on 12 months ago when, according to Deloitte calculations, the Premier League clubs splashed £180m on new personnel.
And that was in itself a plummet from January 2018, when £430m - a record by some distance for the mid-season window created in 2003 - was spent on new players.
That 2018 figure was driven by the arrivals of Virgil van Dijk at Liverpool for £75m and £56m Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang at Arsenal but represents a high-water mark that is unlikely to be topped.
Compare that to the present day, when this month's most lucrative move so far has been Tottenham making permanent their loan of Giovani Lo Celso for a £27.2m fee.
Until Tuesday, it was Aston Villa's £8.5m signing of striker Mbwana Samatta from Belgian club Genk to cover the injured Wesley.
Of course, we could yet see a major move go through such as Manchester United getting their £60m-plus deal for Bruno Fernandes over the line.
But the downward trend when it comes to January spending by the Premier League clubs is now evident, reversing an incremental season-on-season rise from 2012 to 2018.
So how to explain the tightened purse strings? Sportsmail takes a look at some of the possible contributory factors.
JANUARY IS A SELLER'S MARKET...
January is known as the desperadoes' window for a reason. Often it is those clubs whose season is tanking who most feel the urge to dip into the market and strengthen their squads.
Therefore it's the classic seller's market with clubs able to charge pretty much whatever they like for their assets rather than risk losing someone important and see their own season unravel.
Perhaps there's a whiff of desperation around Manchester United at the moment which explains why Sporting Lisbon are trying to extort them out of £68m for Fernandes, a player with a dodgy disciplinary record and who is unproven outside of Portugal.
It all contributes to the sense that there's little value to be had in the January window and the Premier League clubs are waking up and smelling the coffee.
It also checks out that those recruiting this month are largely those involved in the relegation fight, but they're doing so without breaking the bank.
Basement club Norwich spent £450,000 to sign midfielder Lukas Rupp from Hoffenheim, West Ham paid £4m to bring back goalkeeper Darren Randolph, while Ignacio Pussetto was bought by Watford for £7m.
Villa signed Samatta because they have a striker shortage and so needs must, but their other acquisitions this month, Danny Drinkwater and Pepe Reina, have been on loan. Brighton paid £5m to compete the permanent signing of Aaron Mooy.
Burnley and Bournemouth haven't signed anyone so far.
...BUT RELEGATION FEARS STALK EVERY DECISION
It may be a seller's market, yet equally there is absolutely no reason for a Premier League club immersed in the relegation fight to sell a prized asset to a club further up the table in January.
The short-term windfall of cashing in on a star player is nice, but it would be completely dwarfed by the losses that would come from subsequently suffering relegation.
Take Aston Villa for example - they could cash in on Jack Grealish this month and bring in a fee north of £50m.
But then if they missed Grealish's game-winning abilities and returned to the Championship, the blow to their balance sheet would far outweigh the money received for the player.
The difference in television revenue alone between the Premier League and the Championship explains the gulf.
The Premier League TV deal that began this season is worth a total of £1.67bn per season, half of which will be divided equally between the 20 clubs, with a quarter based on league position and the other quarter in facility fees.
And that's domestically. The lucrative global rights market will bring in a further £4.35billion over the next three seasons, a sharp rise of 35 per cent on the previous deal. This is split on a merit basis, decided by league standing.
By means of comparison, the current EFL television rights deal with Sky Sports is worth just £119m per season over five years.
It's little wonder West Ham, who have just announced a pre-tax loss of £28.8m for the last financial year, admitted that Premier League survival is 'an absolute necessity.'
In recent seasons, as much as 90 per cent of Bournemouth's income has been derived from TV money.
Even parachute payments, which come out of the broadcast revenue, wouldn't come close to making up the shortfalls of relegation. They offer roughly £40m for the first year, £35m for the second and £15m for the third.
Taking account of broadcast and commercial revenue, even Huddersfield Town, who finished bottom of last season's Premier League, coined in over £96m. Even with parachute payments, they'll come nowhere near that in the Championship.
But Southampton, who finished a place above the drop zone in 17th, made £104m in revenue and will get the same again, or more, this season because they remain in the land of milk and honey called the Premier League.
So no chairman is going to hold a fire sale of star assets in January. They would look very foolish come May.
RISK OF UNSETTLING A TEAM MID-SEASON
No Premier League manager is going to radically overhaul their squad in the middle of the season, signing half-a-dozen players and then trying to shoehorn them all in.
It upsets the delicate balances of morale, momentum and team cohesion and so January purchases tend to tinker rather than transform.
When they happen, they're targeted. Jurgen Klopp knew Liverpool were in urgent need of a world class centre-half in 2018 and decided it was the right moment to splash out for Van Dijk. They reached the Champions League final that season so it clearly paid off.
One or two additions in the right areas can pay dividends mid-season, any more tinkering and more damage can be done than benefit and managers have realised this.
New signings need time to settle in and adapt to the style of playing in a new team. That's exactly what summer pre-season is for, not the hurly-burly of January.
Even the addition of next month's winter break in the top division this season doesn't necessary ensure a new signing will settle in quickly enough to be effective in the final months of the season.
LEARNING THE LESSONS OF PAST HORROR STORIES
Let's cast our minds back to last January and the signings made by Premier League clubs.
Bournemouth paid £19m to sign Dominic Solanke from Liverpool, the same Solanke who has since failed to score in 31 Premier League appearances. His only goal for the Cherries came against Luton in the FA Cup last month.
Newcastle United spent £20m on Miguel Almiron, who then took 27 Premier League outings before finally breaking his goal duck, against Crystal Palace last month.
Veteran Peter Crouch couldn't find the net for Burnley and Ryan Babel wasn't exactly what Fulham needed to spare them from relegation.
Even the loan moves were naff - Denis Suarez at Arsenal was unlucky with injury but barely played anyway and Gonzalo Higuain flopped at Chelsea.
But they all pale by comparison with Manchester United's signing of Alexis Sanchez, on £350,000-a-week wages, the year before. What an omnishambles that proved to be.
So the negative very much outweighs the positive when it comes to assessing how January arrivals have fared and clubs have taken heed of the warning.
LOAN MOVES ARE LOWER RISK
Seven of the 21 incoming signing by Premier League clubs this month have been loans, including Tottenham's Gedson Fernandes, Newcastle's Nabil Bentaleb and Danny Drinkwater at Villa.
After all, for managers and money men alike, they represent a lower risk option with no commitments beyond the end of the season and often a share of the wage burden with the parent club.
Ten of the 28 signings made in January last year were on a loan basis, so we're exactly on track to match the 35 per cent ratio again.
INCREASING FAITH IN YOUTH
Another big factor nullifying the impulse to spend this month is the growing trend for Premier League managers to put their faith in young players and academy graduates as opposed to just making new signings.
We've seen this most strongly at Manchester United, where Ole Gunnar Solskjaer has promoted the likes of Brandon Williams and Mason Greenwood, and Chelsea, where a transfer ban forced Frank Lampard to use academy graduates.
But this new culture of placing faith in youth isn't restricted to these two. There have been 25 teams fielded in the Premier League this season with an average age under 25.
Ten of these were by United and four by Chelsea, but Bournemouth have done it seven times and Southampton and Aston Villa have also fielded young sides.
By means of comparison there were just eight teams with an average age under 25 in the top flight last season, but that was a drastic increase on one in 2017-18 and one in 2016-17.
With more clubs fielding more young teams, it does hint at the start of a possible trend in which academy graduates, schooled in the club's philosophy, take precedence over imports.
Mind you, the caveat to this is that Solskjaer signed Daniel James and Aaron Wan-Bissaka, both 22, last summer as part of a clear strategy to bring in young players as well as produce them in-house.